More and more the public is being given access to material that wasnever originally meant for its eyes. From film extras added tocollector's edition DVDs to sensitive governmental files declassifiedby laws like the Freedom of Information Act, this once-restrictedmaterial has significantly contributed to our questioning not only theprocess behind a "text's" construction but also its universal claim ofbeing whole/complete/finished upon publication. For example, DVDs thatinclude special features which contain original material edited out offinal production challenge us to weigh our initial response to thecompleted film or TV series against this unseen footage (itselfedited) which, if reinserted, potentially alters the text's controlledmessage. Films and DVDs are, of course, not the only "texts" affectedby deletions and post-production emendations such as these. Otherpotential areas of study could include (but are not limited to):

• the genetic reading of a literary text's manuscripts and or/variorum edition• the comparative analysis of a painting's studies• the parallel reading of a film's or TV series' dialogue with itssubtitles or its dubbing• a comparative reading of an author's bilingual editions• a reconstructive examination of declassified information.

All are examples of how the study of discarded textual materialpracticed on a pluridisciplanary level with interdisciplinary methodspromotes the establishment of a non-teleological grammar that not onlychallenges existing practices of valuing product over process butundermines all categorical distinctions between the two terms. Inother words, studying the fragments "left out" of a text, eitherseparately as texts in and of themselves or in relation to the largerwork from which they were discarded, would serve to demonstrate howthe process is the product. One hypothesis behind the reasons forthese cuts is that they are politically determined by "conservative"motives (in the broader sense of the word: conserve, conservatism,conservation, etc.) and that the lost material often contains the veryseeds of the larger text's deconstruction, which justify theirexclusion.

While research such as this already exists in each of the individualfields mentioned, the colloquium proposes to address the phenomenoncollectively, examining how "left out" material in a variety of fieldsand disciplines reshapes a final text, determines the nature of itsself- or state-imposed expurgation, and establishes a non-teleologicaltheory that values its process as product. What does the editing outor re-insertion of "new" material into a "text" that has alreadybecome fixed for many readers/viewers change in our analysis of it,indeed in our analytical methods in general? Are there any consistentsimilarities in the types of material that are cut, despite the genre?Can studying the editorial process in various disciplines help usconstruct a "theoretical model" of interdisciplinarity that studiesnot only the links between disparate fields but also the researcher'stools with which to study them? While the immediate goal of thecolloquium would be to examine the gestalt of textual construction,its more extended goal would be see if common ground can be foundbetween the interdisciplinary object and subject—between those of uswho study a text using different disciplines and those of us fromdifferent disciplines studying a text—and how this may help us preparefor an academic future wherein interdisciplinary theory and practiceseem poised to become the standard of scientific inquiry more than theexception.

Half-hour presentations can be written in English or in French. Aselection of extended presentations based on the conferenceproceedings will be published in "Regards croisés sur le mondeAnglophone," by the Presses Universitaires de Nancy. Please send yourproposals (title and 500-word abstract) or completed papers by emailattachment to John S. Bak (john.bak_at_univ-nancy2.fr) before 15September 2006.